What is the potential consequence of a jury verdict if juror misconduct occurs?

The potential consequence of a jury verdict when juror misconduct occurs primarily hinges on the nature of that misconduct and its impact on the trial's fairness. If juror misconduct is determined to be harmless, it means that the misconduct did not affect the fundamental fairness of the trial or influence the verdict in any measurable way. In such instances, appellate courts may choose to uphold the verdict to maintain judicial efficiency and finality in legal proceedings, particularly if there is strong evidence supporting the decision reached by the jury.

This principle is grounded in the idea that not all errors in trial proceedings warrant a retrial, especially if they do not critically undermine the integrity of the verdict. Therefore, in cases of juror misconduct where the harm is minimal or the misconduct does not materially influence the outcome, the verdict may be left intact.

The other options suggest automatic actions that do not accurately reflect the legal standards determining the consequences of juror misconduct. Retrying a case in federal court or automatically replacing the jury are not standard procedures as they fail to assess the impact of the misconduct on the trial's outcome. Similarly, ordering a new trial "without question" does not take into account considerations such as the severity or relevance of the misconduct. Thus, the rationale supporting option B aligns with